The best thing about old films is seeing Englishmen or Americans being Africans, or Indians, or Chinese, or just about anything, because we're the best actors, we can even play their race better than they can. Case in point already made in this thread, Mickey Rooney.

unlikely:Looking at the IMDB entry and all the names represented in the cast, I worry that this movie is going to fall into "Too Many Villains" syndrome.

Why does every superhero franchise have to keep adding villains with each sequel? Haven't they figured out by now that adding villains is the step before "complete fail"?

90s Batman didn't teach us anything?Nor Spider Man?

Quick.

If you were born between 1975-1985 I want you to name Batman's most important villain.

Now Spider-Man.

Great; but they're backstories take too long, and actually MAKE SENSE, so remove those.

Now, since we need a reason for the character actually being in the movie, he needs dynamism. Choose one:

A) He's scaryB) He's lost the will to live.C) He knows only hatred, loss or ignorance.D) He's a giant pile of special effects.

Congratulations; you just figured out how to make a truly great villain a horrible, useless, oversized, lumbering plot hole.

/At least Sam Raimi (silently) admitted that he hated what Sony made him do (shoehorn Venom into SM3 - instead of having SM4 a GIANT Spider-Man Vs. Venom arc)... purely by a fan's question at a 2008 meet-n'-greet at Comic-Con; "At the end of Spider-Man 3, Venom gets out of the river, but Spider-Man thinks he's dead... does that mean Venom kills him and Mary Jane?"

::CUE THE MOST EVIL SMILE ON EARTH::

/Don't piass off the director who already has a "plan-B" in case the Studio farks with him.

unlikely:Looking at the IMDB entry and all the names represented in the cast, I worry that this movie is going to fall into "Too Many Villains" syndrome.

Why does every superhero franchise have to keep adding villains with each sequel? Haven't they figured out by now that adding villains is the step before "complete fail"?

90s Batman didn't teach us anything?Nor Spider Man?

Because what could be better then having Iron Man fight the Mandarin, Crimson Dynamo, Doctor Doom, Force, Living Laser, Man Bull, M.O.D.O.K., Ultron, and Whirl Wind all in one movie? No silly character development, no touching moments with Pepper, who gives a fark about Tony Stark, just one long 210 minute super hero smack down scene after another.

The Mandarin's late father was one of the wealthiest men in pre-revolutionary mainland China (and a descendant of Genghis Khan), while his late mother was an English noblewomanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(comics)

Cruise was playing a white guy, though. They didn't pretend he was Japanese.

Also, samurai is being used in its plural form. So tired of that movie being trotted out.

Here's one. If you read the book or read about the actual events behind it, it was about a bunch of Asian MIT students who taught themselves to count cards and broke the bank in Vegas. So when they made the movie for it, they decided to make the cast mostly white.

RexTalionis:unlikely: Rwa2play: unlikely: Looking at the IMDB entry and all the names represented in the cast, I worry that this movie is going to fall into "Too Many Villains" syndrome.

Why does every superhero franchise have to keep adding villains with each sequel? Haven't they figured out by now that adding villains is the step before "complete fail"?

90s Batman didn't teach us anything?Nor Spider Man?

You know how I know you didn't see "The Avengers?"

Name the three villains in the Avengers. Go ahead.

Loki, the Skrulls (look, I know they're Chitauri, but that's a stupid name, so I'm going to call them the Skrulls), and Hawkeye for half the movie.

You see how that's different than trying to cram a new goblin, Sandman, and Venom into a single film, right?

Except that Loki was really the only villain in the film, with the Skrulls (I kinda like Mors's Battledroid thing) as basically henchmen/cannon fodder, and Hawkeye being not so much a villain as a casualty.

Even if you take them all as something other than Loki's goons, the film is supposed to be an ensemble, which is a completely different animal than title-hero films.

Slaves2Darkness:unlikely: Looking at the IMDB entry and all the names represented in the cast, I worry that this movie is going to fall into "Too Many Villains" syndrome.

Why does every superhero franchise have to keep adding villains with each sequel? Haven't they figured out by now that adding villains is the step before "complete fail"?

90s Batman didn't teach us anything?Nor Spider Man?

Because what could be better then having Iron Man fight the Mandarin, Crimson Dynamo, Doctor Doom, Force, Living Laser, Man Bull, M.O.D.O.K., Ultron, and Whirl Wind all in one movie? No silly character development, no touching moments with Pepper, who gives a fark about Tony Stark, just one long 210 minute super hero smack down scene after another.

Why do people say this like it's a bad thing? I know who Stark is and his personality, I get that he and pepper are boinking. I pay the money to see IRON MAN, not Tony Stark.

Slaves2Darkness:unlikely: Looking at the IMDB entry and all the names represented in the cast, I worry that this movie is going to fall into "Too Many Villains" syndrome.

Why does every superhero franchise have to keep adding villains with each sequel? Haven't they figured out by now that adding villains is the step before "complete fail"?

90s Batman didn't teach us anything?Nor Spider Man?

Because what could be better then having Iron Man fight the Mandarin, Crimson Dynamo, Doctor Doom, Force, Living Laser, Man Bull, M.O.D.O.K., Ultron, and Whirl Wind all in one movie? No silly character development, no touching moments with Pepper, who gives a fark about Tony Stark, just one long 210 minute super hero smack down scene after another.